K
kaycee
Guest
Offcourse!
Mary knew she needed a savior. “my spirit has rejoiced in God my savior” (Luke 1:47-48)?
- Status
Mary knew she needed a savior. “my spirit has rejoiced in God my savior” (Luke 1:47-48)?
po18guy
Well-known member
Off Course is right! Tell me: Is a merciful God, who is capable of saving Mary even from original sin, a saving God? Or is your god so small and impotent that he/she/it cannot do any such thing? What shallow faith!Offcourse!
Mary knew she needed a savior. “my spirit has rejoiced in God my savior” (Luke 1:47-48)?
E
emeraldisle
Guest
The Catholic Church teaches that Mary was IC from parents who were both sinners. Of course this teaching isn’t in Gods written word.
Gods teaches us in His written word that the Lord Jesus was miraculously born by the Holy Spirit of a virgin(not a sinless virgin) and that He was sinless. I don’t have a problem with accepting the fact that God enabled the Lord Jesus to be born of a virgin who wasn’t sinless but that He was sinless.
.
po18guy
Well-known member
Forgive me, but sometimes the pot boils. When you purposefully limit your faith to the “written word”, which Christ never did, the complexities and mysteries of our God seem overwhelming. To casually discredit nearly 2,000 years of Catholic teaching is to assume yourself to be more enlightened, more intelligent, more studied and more spiritually gifted than each and every Apostle, early church father, bishop, monk, sister, theologian and scholar who went before - so many of whom shed their blood, gave their earthly lives for those very beliefs which are now questioned and belittled.
They did the heavy lifting. They did the hard work. They broke their sweat, not for them selves, but for us! In imitation of Christ, they suffered for our sake, so that we can have a discourse without violent bloodshed. I am inferior to each of them. I place my faith and trust in their labors of love, which point inerrantly to Christ Himself. Faith is so much less complex to those of humble heart.
I trust that little man with the German accent to lead me to Christ, as that is exactly his destination. To claim otherwise is to ramble like a fool.
Christ’s peace be with you.
A
anthony022071
Guest
That is because modern Catholic bible translators make modernist and ecumenical compromises.
That’s alright,because as the early Church fathers knew,not everything that pertains to the faith is contained in scripture.
Irenaeus:
"Through none others know we the disposition of our salvation, than those through whom the gospel came to us, first heralding it, then by the will of God delivering to us the Scriptures, which were to be the foundation and pillar of our faith…But when, the heretics are Scriptures, as if they were wrong, and unauthoritative, and were variable, and the truth could not be extracted from them by those who were ignorant of Tradition…And when we challenge them in turn what that tradition, which is from the Apostles, which is guarded by the succession of elders in the churches, they oppose themselves to Tradition, saying that they are wiser, not only than those elders, but even than the Apostles. The Tradition of the Apostles, manifested ‘on the contrary’ in the whole world, is open in every Church to all who see the truth…And, since it is a long matter in a work like this to enumerate these successions, we will confute them by pointing to the Tradition of that greatest and most ancient and universally known Church, founded and constituted at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, a tradition which she has had and a faith which she proclaims to all men from those Apostles.’ Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3,1-3 (inter A.D. 180/199).
St. Epiphanius of Salamis:
“It is needful also to make use of tradition, for not everything can be gotten from sacred Scripture. The holy apostles handed down some things in the scriptures, other things in tradition” (Medicine Chest Against All Heresies 61:6 [A.D. 375]).
Basil:
“Of the dogmas and kerygmas preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching and others we receive from the tradition of the apostles, handed on to us in mystery. In respect to piety both are of the same force. No one will contradict any of these, no one, at any rate, who is even moderately versed in matters ecclesiastical. Indeed, were we to try to reject unwritten customs as having no great authority, we would unwittingly injure the gospel in its vitals; or rather, we would reduce kerygma to a mere term.” (The Holy Spirit, 27, 66 [A.D. 375]).
St. John Chrysostom:
“[Paul commands,] ‘Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you have been taught, whether by word or by our letter’ [2 Thess. 2:15]. From this it is clear that they did not hand down everything by letter, but there is much also that was not written. Like that which was written, the unwritten too is worthy of belief. So let us regard the tradition of the Church also as worthy of belief. Is it a tradition? Seek no further” (Homilies on Second Thessalonians [A.D. 402]).
St. Augustine:
“The custom [of not rebaptizing converts] . . . may be supposed to have had its origin in apostolic tradition, just as there are many things which are observed by the whole Church, and therefore are fairly held to have been enjoined by the apostles, which yet are not mentioned in their writings” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 5:23[31] [A.D. 400]).
A
anthony022071
Guest
It is God’s spoken word,which was preserved in the Church’s apostolic tradition.
John 16,12-13
I have yet many things to say to you: but you cannot bear them now. But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth.
St. Basil,On the Holy Spirit:
66. Of the beliefs and practices whether generally accepted or publicly enjoined which are preserved in the Church some we possess derived from written teaching; others we have received delivered to us “in a mystery” by the tradition of the apostles; and both of these in relation to true religion have the same force. And these no one will gainsay;-no one, at all events, who is even moderately versed in the institutions of the Church. For were we to attempt to reject such customs as have no written authority, on the ground that the importance they possess is small, we should unintentionally injure the Gospel in its very vitals; or, rather, should make our public definition a mere phrase and nothing more. For instance, to take the first and most general example, who is thence who has taught us in writing to sign with the sign of the cross those who have trusted in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ? What writing has taught us to turn to the East at the prayer? Which of the saints has left us in writing the words of the invocation at the displaying of the bread of the Eucharist and the cup of blessing? For we are not, as is well known, content with what the apostle or the Gospel has recorded, but both in preface and conclusion we add other words as being of great importance to the validity of the ministry, and these we derive from unwritten teaching. Moreover we bless the water of baptism and the oil of the chrism, and besides this the catechumen who is being baptized. On what written authority do we do this? Is not our authority silent and mystical tradition? Nay, by what written word is the anointing of oil itself taught? And whence comes the custom of baptizing thrice? And as to the other customs of baptism from what Scripture do we derive the renunciation of Satan and his angels? Does not this come from that unpublished and secret teaching which our fathers guarded in a silence out of the reach of curious meddling and inquisitive investigation? Well had they learnt the lesson that the awful dignity of the mysteries is best preserved by silence. What the uninitiated are not even allowed: to look at was hardly likely to be publicly paraded about in written documents.
G
Good_Fella
Guest
Your faulty and unauthoritative interpretation of Scripture denies Mary’s sinless nature. Isolating a single passage and removing it from the scriptures as a whole leads one to an erroneous understanding of the text. Scripture as a whole - from Genesis to Revelations - provides ample evidence that Mary was conceived without the stain of original sin and sinless in her entire life. Mary was assumed into heaven and bodily glorified by her Divine Son not only because she is his mother, but because she was sinless. Her tomb is empty. Show me her remains and then I’ll believe you that she was without sin and subject to the corruption of death.
The Church has infallibly and authoritatively declared that Mary was sinless. The doctrine is implicitly revealed in the Gospel of Luke and was consistently taught by the Church Fathers since the second century.A private individual like yourself and your pastor are not in a tenable position to refute this teaching of the One Apostolic Catholic Church, outside the Church where there is no salvation for those who consciously reject the truth and separated from the historic Christian faith.
In the Scriptures, the One Catholic Apostolic Church is called the body of Christ ( Rom 12, 1; 1 Cor 10 ,12 ) and the bride of Christ ( Eph 5; Rev 21). And the Church is likened to God’s living temple ( Eph 2; 1 Pet 2 ). Jesus described himself as God’s living temple that could be raised in three days ( Jn 2, 19 ). Thus the Church is identified with her groom and master who is “the truth, the way, and the life” ( Jn 14, 6 ). As a bride becomes one flesh with her husband, so the Church, the bride of Christ, becomes one, unified spirit with her Lord. Hence, the Church cannot err and betray her Lord nor be betrayed by him who is ever faithful in his promise to guide the Church (the bride of the Lord) in all truth by the mediation of the Holy Spirit ( Jn 16, 12-13) and is rightly called “the pillar and bulwark of truth” ( 1Tim 3,15 ). Mary had a sinless nature to be sure, since this is a true teaching of the Catholic Church. What the Church teaches cannot conflict with the written Word, for Christ conferred his Divine authority to his Church ( the Apostolic college and hierarchy ) to preach the Gospel until the end of time.
Here is a passage you should humbly and wisely heed:
“Our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.” ( 2 Peter 3, 15-16)
It is obvious that the Bible is not self-explanatory and formally self-sufficient. The numerous Christological and Trinitarian heresies that arose in the early centuries, and the division of the Protestant heresy, attest to this fact. Scripture must be interpreted in accord with Tradition by the Apostolic teaching authority of the Church. Jesus promised to send the Paraclete to those whom he commissioned to preach the Gospel for the sake of truth and unity of faith in him. Unauthoritative and private judgments made on the part of private individuals, such as Arius or Luther, sow dissent and cause division because they come from the devil in the first place and not by the guidance of the Spirit of truth. Protestantism is a divided house headed towards ruin, since this religious movement was not initiated by the Spirit of our Lord, notwithstanding its faulty adherence to the concept of ‘sola scriptura’.
Pax vobiscum
Good Fella
S
sandusky
Guest
Please list the sins of Simeon, and Anna the prophetess, who is the daughter of Phanuel (Lk 2:25ff).
G
Good_Fella
Guest
You must be aware by now that the Church does not believe and teach that Mary was in no need of a saviour along with the rest of humanity. A creature like us, Mary was in need of redemption being implicated in the sin of Adam and Eve. It is because she was implicated that God intervened by preserving her free from the stain of original sin. The Immaculate Conception was necessary, for “all have sinned”, but in Mary’s case the sin of Adam and Eve did not necessarily have to be inherited. Indeed, it was sufficient that Mary be implicated in sin without actually inheriting it, as it was sufficient for Enoch and Elijah to die, although they did not actually die, death passing on “all” men. Isn’t it time for Protestants to abandon their feeble argument by citing Paul’s Epistle to the Romans?Offcourse!
Mary knew she needed a savior. “my spirit has rejoiced in God my savior” (Luke 1:47-48)?
Pax vobiscum
Good Fella
E
emeraldisle
Guest
Are you really suggesting that Gods written word isn’t sufficient for the Christian faith, that God was unable to give us the necessary teaching for the Christian faith in His written word.
.
E
emeraldisle
Guest
I’m just posting the Scripture verses that clearly speak for themselves. These verses come from God, not me and they clearly state Gods Truth that the Lord Jesus was sinless and that all of the rest of humanity that came from Adam are sinners.
Was Mary part of humanity that came from Adam?
For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin. Heb 4:15
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Rom 5:12
.
S
sambos671
Guest
I will start out by saying that I’m generally against the idea that Mary is immaculately concieved or was a perpetual virgin. However, I was studing the book of Judges and came accross the story of Samson. One thing I noticed that I haven’t before was that the angel of the Lord told Samson’s mother that Samson was to be dedicated to the Lord as a Nazerite holding to that solomn vow. What hit me was before Samson was born his mother had to also adhere to the vow. I wonder if the catholic church draws a connection between these two events. Anyone know?
A
Axion
Guest
Curious. If this “written word” was all that was needed, that it wasn’t put together until 382 AD. Before the Bible was put together by the Church in 382, who taught then?
A
anthony022071
Guest
S
sandusky
Guest
Then all of those in Mary’s lineage would have to have been saved in the same manner back to Adam and Eve; isn’t that correct? :ehh:
A
Axion
Guest
This has been explained to you OVER AND OVER AGAIN. Yet you refuse to listen or acknowledge the points others make, but just keep repeating the same nonsense ad-infinitum. This is dishonest.
You are just trolling the boards.
G
Good_Fella
Guest
No it isn’t. Mary was just a human being. God directly intervened with her Immaculate Conception because the child she would bear is the Only-begotten Son of God. It could be that Jesus would have inherited a human nature inclined to sin if his mother had been conceived in the state of original sin. Of course, our Lord’s divine nature could not possibly be affected, but his human nature is a different story. As a human being, he was born of the Virgin Mary, as a Divine Person Jesus is the Only-begotten Son of God. Jesus is a single person, but his two natures are distinct. And human nature is inferior to the Divine nature. The Son of Man did express grave doubt and fear during his Passion. I’m afraid this question will forever remain a mystery to us. It remains a subject for theological speculation.
Pax vobiscum
Good Fella
S
sandusky
Guest
If God could keep Mary from the stain of OS, He could keep Jesus from it as well.No it isn’t. Mary was just a human being. God directly intervened with her Immaculate Conception because the child she would bear is the Only-begotten Son of God. It could be that Jesus would have inherited a human nature inclined to sin if his mother had been conceived in the state of original sin. Of course, our Lord’s divine nature could not possibly be affected, but his human nature is a different story. As a human being, he was born of the Virgin Mary, as a Divine Person Jesus is the Only-begotten Son of God. Jesus is a single person, but his two natures are distinct. And human nature is inferior to the Divine nature. The Son of Man did express grave doubt and fear during his Passion. I’m afraid this question will forever remain a mystery to us. It remains a subject for theological speculation.
Pax vobiscum
Good Fella
Thus, as the church has said, it is not necessary that Mary be immaculately conceived,
but fitting—big difference.
P
paramedicgirl
Guest
The best book anyone can read to fully understand the dogmas of the Blessed Virgin Mary is The Glories of Mary by St. Alphonsus Liguori.
F
franjos
Guest
To All :
If anyone has problems accepting the Catholic faith about the honor and dignity of Mary as Immaculately Conceived, please stop arguing and pray. I used to doubt this mystery and the rest of the sacraments of Catholic faith. But when I started to pray the 15 mysteries of the Holy Rosary everyday, since October 2007, I started to understand the Immaculate Concepcion by heart, little by little. And all the sacraments of the Catholic Church. Then I realized why I could not grasp the faith. The truth is worldly minds could never grasp it (no matter how intelligent we are). Unlike science, math, physics etc, which we could understand through research and worldy methods, mysteries of faith is different. It could only be understood thru GRACE. And grace comes only from God. And God only gives grace to the humble, for God resists the proud (1 Peter 5:5)
Reflect on this diagram:
Proud People → God Resists → No Grace → No Understanding (even if they are very intelligent)
Humility → Prayer → God loves very dearly → Receives Grace → Receives Understanding
So, if anyone want to fully understand these mysteries, pray the 15 mysteries (with litany) everyday first for one month, then go back to this forum and tell your experience.
God Bless to everyone.
If anyone has problems accepting the Catholic faith about the honor and dignity of Mary as Immaculately Conceived, please stop arguing and pray. I used to doubt this mystery and the rest of the sacraments of Catholic faith. But when I started to pray the 15 mysteries of the Holy Rosary everyday, since October 2007, I started to understand the Immaculate Concepcion by heart, little by little. And all the sacraments of the Catholic Church. Then I realized why I could not grasp the faith. The truth is worldly minds could never grasp it (no matter how intelligent we are). Unlike science, math, physics etc, which we could understand through research and worldy methods, mysteries of faith is different. It could only be understood thru GRACE. And grace comes only from God. And God only gives grace to the humble, for God resists the proud (1 Peter 5:5)
Reflect on this diagram:
Proud People → God Resists → No Grace → No Understanding (even if they are very intelligent)
Humility → Prayer → God loves very dearly → Receives Grace → Receives Understanding
So, if anyone want to fully understand these mysteries, pray the 15 mysteries (with litany) everyday first for one month, then go back to this forum and tell your experience.
God Bless to everyone.
- Status